Jump to content

Tyreek Hill


Nozizaki

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, SmittyBacall said:

What makes a receiver elite? 

I think it's simple. What makes a WR elite is that they can't be covered. Either meaning they always find a way to get open (Moss, Rice), or your coverage is perfect but they're gonna catch it anyway (Carter, Fitzgerald).

Oh, and catching. That one's important. No receiver can be elite if they're leading the league in drop rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2018 at 11:37 AM, SmittyBacall said:

What makes a receiver elite? 

Production + Skillset/Tangibles + Consistency.

Everyone knows an elite WR needs to produce. You won’t ever call a WR who never tops 900 yards and 4 TDs an elite receiver. Production is highly impacted by surrounding factors (coaching, QB, run game, other WRs, etc.) but high production is almost a given. The very best can usually do it with a mediocre supporting cast.

The WR needs to display a great skillset. That’s catching, route running, speed (which is more a talent than a skill, but whatever), strength, etc. Think ratings. These skills are independent of their environment (although they may be harder to see in a terrible situation). Not all skills are weighted equally in everyone’s mind (small size + speed vs physicality + a little slower), but some like catching are absolutely required. To be an elite receiver, you need some elite skills.

Then consistency. Dozens of receivers probably flash elite ability within the confines of a single game, but those that can do so throughout a season or for many seasons all together, can be labeled as elite. Like the other two, there are different standards that vary by person - for some, one season isn’t enough. But there needs to be some level of consistency. 

Problem is all those things get weighted differently so there’s lots of room for debate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Production + Skillset/Tangibles + Consistency.

Everyone knows an elite WR needs to produce. You won’t ever call a WR who never tops 900 yards and 4 TDs an elite receiver. Production is highly impacted by surrounding factors (coaching, QB, run game, other WRs, etc.) but high production is almost a given. The very best can usually do it with a mediocre supporting cast.

The WR needs to display a great skillset. That’s catching, route running, speed (which is more a talent than a skill, but whatever), strength, etc. Think ratings. These skills are independent of their environment (although they may be harder to see in a terrible situation). Not all skills are weighted equally in everyone’s mind (small size + speed vs physicality + a little slower), but some like catching are absolutely required. To be an elite receiver, you need some elite skills.

Then consistency. Dozens of receivers probably flash elite ability within the confines of a single game, but those that can do so throughout a season or for many seasons all together, can be labeled as elite. Like the other two, there are different standards that vary by person - for some, one season isn’t enough. But there needs to be some level of consistency. 

Problem is all those things get weighted differently so there’s lots of room for debate. 

Wowzers, perfect answer. This is what I was looking for, well done. 

I guess the remaining question would be how do you see production and skillset proportionally weighted? 50/50? 25/75? Can you have equal skillsets to another and lack production in comparison but still be seen as equals? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, SmittyBacall said:

Wowzers, perfect answer. This is what I was looking for, well done. 

I guess the remaining question would be how do you see production and skillset proportionally weighted? 50/50? 25/75?

It’s tough, I think everyone will answer that differently especially if you factor in who the player has around them. You can go in virtually any thread and see “Player A has a better supporting cast - if Player B had that they’d be HOFers” type arguments. And there’s merit to that in some instances because sometimes it matters a lot - comparing Michael Thomas’ situation to someone like OBJ’s would be foolish. But there’s really no “right way”, we can’t prove negatives.

For me, I tend to lean a little more towards skills than production. But I’m not some WR scout or something, so what do I even know? It’s all a toss-up, lol.

50 minutes ago, SmittyBacall said:

Can you have equal skillsets to another and lack production in comparison but still be seen as equals? 

I think so, yes. I think there are times when people see a WR in a bad situation and see that their production is being suppressed in some way. An easy example is Nuk, but I’m not sure if he fits since his production is still high, just not as high as it could be if he were playing in NE or something. 

But I’ll use two guys who I have as comparable in terms of which tier they’re on - Keenan Allen and Davonte Adams. Adams has more catches, TDs, and yards than Allen, but I actually think they both bring similar (but not identical) skills to the table. Adams probably has a little more speed but Keenan is a bit more savvy in his route running. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2018 at 6:55 PM, jrry32 said:

The top 5 is pretty clear right now imo (in no order): AB, Hopkins, Julio, OBJ, and Tyreek. After that, it's more difficult. You have AJ, Thomas, Cooks, Thielen, Adams, Evans, Diggs, etc.

What will it take for people to start talking about Josh Gordon as an elite receiver again? Honest question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/25/2018 at 2:20 PM, SmittyBacall said:

Wowzers, perfect answer. This is what I was looking for, well done. 

I guess the remaining question would be how do you see production and skillset proportionally weighted? 50/50? 25/75? Can you have equal skillsets to another and lack production in comparison but still be seen as equals? 

See, you pretend you were looking for a legit answer but you went right back to what you not so subtly hinted at. You're trying to hint that you can't be an elite WR if you aren't an elite athlete. Its a case by case basis. You can look at a guy like Chris Hogan and see that he's put up decent numbers in the past for the Patriots, but I think we all know that Hogan doesn't ooze talent or skill. He's just a decent dude put into a great situation. I think when you're discussing the top 10ish WRs right now, production outweighs skill set. Outside of Julio, AB and ODB I think all the top end WRs have similar skill levels. Hopkins is probably in that upper group as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, braylon said:

What will it take for people to start talking about Josh Gordon as an elite receiver again? Honest question. 

Josh Gordon looks considerably slower than he did with the Browns IMO. I think it takes him a full season and off-season to really get that burst back. If he puts up 1200 and 6-10 TDs next year with the Patriots I think he re-enters the discussion but people will always be hesitant as he's one bone headed mistake from being out of the NFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/27/2018 at 9:40 AM, MookieMonstah said:

See, you pretend you were looking for a legit answer but you went right back to what you not so subtly hinted at. You're trying to hint that you can't be an elite WR if you aren't an elite athlete. Its a case by case basis. You can look at a guy like Chris Hogan and see that he's put up decent numbers in the past for the Patriots, but I think we all know that Hogan doesn't ooze talent or skill. He's just a decent dude put into a great situation. I think when you're discussing the top 10ish WRs right now, production outweighs skill set. Outside of Julio, AB and ODB I think all the top end WRs have similar skill levels. Hopkins is probably in that upper group as well.

You've drastically misinterpreted what I said to fit your claim. That sentence has nothing to do with what you're alluding to. It has nothing to do with elite athleticism, I don't even know how you could pull that out of that sentence. I'll break it down for you.

Receiver A and Receiver B have identical skillsets/talent. A and B both have the capacity to fulfill their full potential (production) given circumstances that are advantageous to assist them into reaching that potential. Receiver A is not in a position that fulfills that potential in comparison to B. Should A and B still be seen as equals given uneven circumstances, even though one is outproducing the other? I say yes.

@MookieMonstah comprende?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, braylon said:

What will it take for people to start talking about Josh Gordon as an elite receiver again? Honest question. 

He hasn't looked nearly as good individually as he did years ago when he broke out. I wouldn't take him over the Thielen's, Allen's or Diggs of the world right now and I have a hard time seeing that change moving forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/27/2018 at 7:57 AM, braylon said:

What will it take for people to start talking about Josh Gordon as an elite receiver again? Honest question. 

I think he's still shaking off the rust, and really hasn't been in NE long enough to develop a rapport with Brady or Belly. I'm grading him as an "NA" or an "Incomplete" for now - regardless if he catches fire this season or goes silent from here on out.

Next season (with zero distractions over suspensions, meetings with the Commissioner, etc) is when we'll be able to see whether or not he can get back to where he was. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...